Ground Can't Cause a Fumble

[bob jenkins]

assuming the "three steps" were part of F5's momentum of trying to make the catch, you got it right (well, except for the foul part).

It's a common myth.

Tell the coach, "This isn't football" or "that isn't true in baseball." If he persists, "Coach, I've explained it. We need to move on."

[dash_riprock]

I second what Bob said. Also, do not allow the coach to discuss YOUR call with your partner. This is not a survey. Your partner should have refused to talk to him and sent him back to you.

[Dave Reed]

dash,
jicecone hasn't explained the situation after the ball was on the ground, presumably because it isn't important to the "ground causing a fumble." But if the B/R is now standing on 1st base following an apparent foul ball, I would expect any umpire on the field to listen carefully to the DC, if for no other reason than to give jicecone time to recognize the error.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

dash,
jicecone hasn't explained the situation after the ball was on the ground, presumably because it isn't important to the "ground causing a fumble." But if the B/R is now standing on 1st base following an apparent foul ball, I would expect any umpire on the field to listen carefully to the DC, if for no other reason than to give jicecone time to recognize the error.

I don't agree. If the coach convinces the calling umpire to talk to his partner, that is fine. In some cases, it is an accepted procedure for an umpire to approach his partner (who made the call) to offer additional information. But it is not OK for a coach to approach other umpires not involved in the initial call.

If a coach tries to go to my partner on a call I made, I will intercept him. If he comes to me when my partner made the call, I will send him to my partner without any discussion of the call.

[jicecone]

Actually, when the DC went to my partner first as I called time and walked away to home plate. My partner sent him to me. R3 froze on third and afterwards my partner who was in the "B" position said that he did not realize the ball was first touched in foul territory anyway. Had I realized that I didn't make the correct call on the Fair/Foul then or was uncertain about it, I probably would have talked with my partner.

The coach did not discuss foul/fair, he wanted me to ask my partner if it was a catch or not. I told him that I was 100% sure that it was not, a catch and did not need to discuss it with my partner.

[Mrumpiresir]

I know you realize it, but I gotta emphasize your first responsibility is fair/foul. It's important. So many bad things can happen.

[jicecone]

Your absolutely correct, no excuse. As soon as the player hit the ground and dropped the ball I should have been all over it. Brain freeze, old age, no bearing on the outcome of the game, etc, etc, etc. Still not accepatable to me, for missing the call.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

assuming the "three steps" were part of F5's momentum of trying to make the catch, you got it right (well, except for the foul part).

It's a common myth.

Tell the coach, "This isn't football" or "that isn't true in baseball." If he persists, "Coach, I've explained it. We need to move on."

Actually the rule or the philosophy is almost exactly like football. The problem is people use that line in many inaccurate ways. The ground cannot cause a fumble, but it can cause an incompletion. But your point is taken.

Peace

[maven]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Actually the rule or the philosophy is almost exactly like football. The problem is people use that line in many inaccurate ways. The ground cannot cause a fumble, but it can cause an incompletion. But your point is taken.

Peace

The ground CAN cause a fumble. If the runner trips, lands on the ball and no part of his body touches the ground before the ball comes loose, the ground has caused a fumble.

And yes, I've seen it.

I agree that the OP is not a catch.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by maven

The ground CAN cause a fumble. If the runner trips, lands on the ball and no part of his body touches the ground before the ball comes loose, the ground has caused a fumble.

And yes, I've seen it.

I agree that the OP is not a catch.

Isn't it more properly "A grounded ball cannot be fumbled"? That's how I think of it as a non-football official. If the runner is down by rule or contact, he can't fumble, if he isn't then he can.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by maven

The ground CAN cause a fumble. If the runner trips, lands on the ball and no part of his body touches the ground before the ball comes loose, the ground has caused a fumble.

And yes, I've seen it.

I agree that the OP is not a catch.

Or, in the NFL, if runner falls without being contacted by a defender, and the ball comes out (whether his body touches the ground or not), it's a fumble.